Glock Talk

Glock Talk (http://glocktalk.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Furball Forum (http://glocktalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=201)
-   -   The ANTI-Conspiracy Nut, or Kook, or Fool... so you say? (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1429594)

Peace Warrior 06-27-2012 21:07

The ANTI-Conspiracy Nut, or Kook, or Fool... so you say?
 
So you're an anti-conspiracy nut!!!
But:

It's not because you believe that oswald was the only shooter.

It's not because you believe that there is no such organization as Bildeberger's.

It's not because you believe that there is no such organization as the CFR.

It's not because you believe that only 19 terrorists brought down 1, 2, & 7 WTC skyscrapers on 09-11-2001.

It's not because you believe that climate change is real and the world is heating up at an alarming rate.

Oh no, in fact, one reason you're an anti-conspiracy nut is because you are too wise, or too smart, or too intelligent or just plain too much yourself to ever get past your own cognitive dissonance on certain matters.

Another reason you're an anti-conspiracy nut is because your own, personal opinion of someone tends to lead you to disbelieve anything they might support or put forth on a controversial issue. ETA: Your opinion of another may be due to adopting the opinion of the herd before you got to know that person for yourself.

However, the primary, number one reason you're an anti-conspiracy nut is because you cannot handle the ridicule of yourself or your opinions on what are known as controversial matters. Your perception of "their normal" is invaluable to you as far as the way others see or think of you.

Even if the crowd is wrong, or they have a weak foundation for their beliefs, and even if you know this deep down, you still can't handle not being an accepted member of those you admire, respect, or desire to be part of their group. You have to be part of what you perceive to be the "in crowd." You cannot live outside of the approval of those around you and being accepted as part of their herd. So, instead of rationally and logically thinking things out for yourself, you default to the herd mentality and eschew anything the herd doesn't approve of readily.

This is what makes you an anti-conspiracy nut and kook. You're wrong, but you have what you need the most, which is the approval of the crowd.

countrygun 06-27-2012 21:27

http://i1231.photobucket.com/albums/...G/flouride.png

countrygun 06-27-2012 22:29

It's not because you believe that oswald was the only

shooter

Yes,yes it is, I have the Carcano that my dad put in my hands when I was a smart alec teenager quoting "conspiracy theories" I was able to prove to myself that it was well within Oswald and the rifles capabilities. Before Occam's razor was ever explained to me I realized the Conspiracy theorists were making mountains out of molehills.

It's not because you believe that there is no such organization

as Bildeberger's It's not because you believe that there is no such

organization as the CFR.

why is it, when asked to PROVE these organizations exist and are as claimed, the answer is always "There secret and you can't so that proves they are a secret organization and they exist. If you could prove it, they wouldn't be secret"?

It's not because you believe that only 19

terrorists brought down 1, 2, & 7 WTC skyscrapers on 09-11-2001

Again, ye, yes it is. it is because I don't believe Rosie O'Donnels crackpot theories. I have melted steel with fire despite her expert opinion that it can't be done.

I also have a bit of personal experience which makes me sure that is exactly what happened.

not because you believe that climate change is real and the world is heating up

at an alarming rate

Once more, yes, yes it is because I think "climate change" is a farce based on the data supplied by the theorists them selves. there is nothing alarming and there is NOTHING that hasn't happened BEFORE man walked upright. It is merely a part of the ebb and flow of the planet, it's normal cycle. Those wishing to blame man for it are over aggrandizing man's effect on the planet for political reasons.

 

There ARE plans, crafted trends, influences on society and certain social engineering trends in schools for instance, that I do think exist. I also think much of it is due to to making the lowest standard of intellectual performance "acceptable" as part of the trend.

When I hear people talk about "conspiracies and how they are so smart because they "know" all this. I see a social misfit, probably in Mom's basement with no significant acheivements in their little life, looking for a belief in something that justifies their lack of accomplishment and makes them feel "special" nonetheless.

They didn't get a pony for their ninth birthday and the Tri-lateral comission was behind their disappointent.

 

Peace Warrior 06-28-2012 05:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by countrygun (Post 19138672)
Quote:

It's not because you believe that oswald was the only shooter

Yes,yes it is, I have the Carcano that my dad put in my hands when I was a smart alec teenager quoting "conspiracy theories" I was able to prove to myself that it was well within Oswald and the rifles capabilities. Before Occam's razor was ever explained to me I realized the Conspiracy theorists were making mountains out of molehills.
...

What do you do with all the evidence concerning the President's convertible being shot up? Namely, it is undisputed that there is a 'through-and-through' bullet hole in the windshield and a dent caused by a bullet in the windshield's "top rail" part of the frame.

In deference to the warren commission's findings, how do you explain, just these two additional shots, inside of the warren commission final report? Keep in mind that photos and or film from the day of the shooting prove they exist.

What say you? Will you at least admit 5 shots now?

Peace Warrior 06-28-2012 05:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by countrygun (Post 19138672)
Quote:

...It's not because you believe that there is no such organization as Bildeberger's. ... It's not because you believe that there is no such organization as the CFR. ...
...why is it, when asked to PROVE these organizations exist and are as claimed, the answer is always "There secret and you can't so that proves they are a secret organization and they exist. If you could prove it, they wouldn't be secret"?
...

I guess the why you inquire about is because you've never asked someone that has half a brain.

As far as Bildeberger: The moniker, Bildeberger, was derived from the name of the hotel where they had there first meeting (the public known about) ca. Spring of 1954.

Simply google: The Bilderberg Club or Bildeberger. it is no secret they exist. Only anti-conspiracy kooks believe they don't exist.
Quote:

Originally Posted by countrygun (Post 19138672)
Quote:

... It's not because you believe that there is no such organization as the CFR. ...
...why is it, when asked to PROVE these organizations exist and are as claimed, the answer is always "There secret and you can't so that proves they are a secret organization and they exist. If you could prove it, they wouldn't be secret"?...

The CFR, or formally, the council on foreign relations, is not a secret by no means. Heck, they have their own website! Link here. Only anti-conspiracy nuts believe they don't exist.

Peace Warrior 06-28-2012 06:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by countrygun (Post 19138672)
Quote:

... It's not because you believe that only 19 terrorists brought down 1, 2, & 7 WTC skyscrapers on 09-11-2001. ...
...Again, ye, yes it is. it is because I don't believe Rosie O'Donnels crackpot theories. I have melted steel with fire despite her expert opinion that it can't be done.

I also have a bit of personal experience which makes me sure that is exactly what happened.
...

I'm not going to discuss ms. o'donnel's beliefs for two reasons. One, I do NOT know her personally. Two, even though I might believe she is right on this one, she is not an expert in the field of engineering, architecture, or aircraft. So let's leave her out of this one.

Now, moving beyond such selective, ad hominem rhetoric, I'd be grateful to hear about your "personal experience which makes [you] sure that [19 terrorists bringing down 1, 2, & 7 WTC skyscrapers on 09-11-2001] is exactly what happened."

As for me, I most often rely on the expertise of others who are qualified as experts in their respective fields as well as the eyewitness accounts, news reports, videos and or audio recordings (professional and amateur) all from the day of 9-11 itself.

After the fact, I'll also rely on the finding of qualified experts, such as those gathered together on the net at places like pilots for 9-11 truth, and or architects and engineers for 9-11 truth.

Simply put, only anti-conspiracy kooks think that 1, 2, & 7 WTC skyscrapers came down solely due to fires on 9-11.

Peace Warrior 06-28-2012 06:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by countrygun (Post 19138672)
Quote:

... It's not because you believe that climate change is real and the world is heating up at an alarming rate. ...
...Once more, yes, yes it is because I think "climate change" is a farce based on the data supplied by the theorists them selves. there is nothing alarming and there is NOTHING that hasn't happened BEFORE man walked upright. It is merely a part of the ebb and flow of the planet, it's normal cycle. Those wishing to blame man for it are over aggrandizing man's effect on the planet for political reasons. ...

I see we are in 100% agreement on this one.

Even so, only anti-conspiracy kooks believe that global warming/climate change is caused by anthropogenic means and that this conclusion is backed up by actual science.

airmotive 06-28-2012 08:43

You still mad about the British Empire?

countrygun 06-28-2012 13:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peace Warrior (Post 19139163)
I see we are in 100% agreement on this one.

Even so, only anti-conspiracy kooks believe that global warming/climate change is caused by anthropogenic means and that this conclusion is backed up by actual science.


And how do these "eggspurts" explain the same sort of changes in Earth's climate BEFORE man and after his arrival before industrialization?

Several bits of my history come into play when it comes to 9/11

I was in construction and I also happen to be a blacksmith and knife maker today. I am well aware of the effects of heat on steel and of structural stresses. I am also aware of the incredibly complex "conspiracy" that would have to take place and how long in advance the planning would have to be in place for any other answer to be possible. To have put all of the planning in the hands of 19 cretinous fanatics in order for the plan to succeed is ridiculous. To epect it was done in complete secrecy without one single person actually coming forward and saying "Yes, I took part in placing the explosives (or what ever crackpot scheme you have in mind) is ludicrous. This from a Government who couldn't hide a blow job?

For the real meat of my direct experience with terrorism. Long before you ever heard of the word it was a serious issue. In 1984 I took part in an "anti-Terrorism" seminar at my University (Portland State) As both a student and a memeber of the Law Enforcement community. Among the participants was Dr. Manfred Schrieber who had been the Mayor of Munich Germany during the Olympics and the "Munich Massacre) he went on to become the equivilant of "Secretary of State) for West Germany. It was a rather high level operation and was partially sponsored by the (then) "LEAA". There were speakers and participants form over the Country and more than one Nation.

Here is where I realized that incompetence was going to lead to America's eventual victimization and was therefore not completely surprised by 9/11.

My "Group" of 5 students, some of them LEOs, put forth a well researched paper on the possibility of a terrorist attack in our area. Using what we had learned of the fundamentalist Muslim ideaology way back then in the early 80's, we posited that it was possible for a handful of fanatics to hijack a plane, west bound into PDX. The right flight would not have to deviate an appreciable amount for it's path to take it down the Columbia river with it's target being Bonneville Dam. The resulting impact would not only flood a large portion of industrial Portland (we used the VanPort flood as a "damage map") and would have flooded and perhaps destroyed the Trojan Nuclear Power Plant on the Columbia, but this would also cause a "cascade failure" of much of the power grid in the western US.

We of course put this forward as an example of just one weak spot in the Country.

For our efforts, we were patted on the head by the representatives of the US Government and told " That is a nice bit of imaginative thinking, but really, nobody is going to hijack a plane to crash it into a structure"

At that point I realized the power and danger of incompetence. I started making plans to quit my job, pile up lots of money and get the heck out of an urban environment. I succeeded. My very first words on 9/11 were, "they finally did it"

No it didn't take any "Conspiracy" at all. The damage is easily understood. The incompetence that allowed it to happen was present for years

Nothing mysterious to me.

And you Conspiracy buffs are nuttier than Squirrel ****.

Peace Warrior 06-28-2012 13:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by airmotive (Post 19139684)
You still mad about the British Empire?

Huh? Sorry, but I don't follow. :dunno:

ETA: Oh wait! The brit's empire thread, no, not mad at all, that thread was just being hijacked with other posters' interpersonal qualms.

There were some interesting points brought up, but on the wrong thread, so this is the thread AND THE FORUM for what the brit's empire thread devolved into. Besides, I've been asking the anti-conspiracy kooks to start a thread on each topic they'd bring up and they all were too scared to do it. So heck, I'll do it here.

Peace Warrior 06-28-2012 14:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by countrygun (Post 19140776)
And how do these "eggspurts" explain the same sort of changes in Earth's climate BEFORE man and after his arrival before industrialization?

Several bits of my history come into play when it comes to 9/11 ...

I said we agreed on this one. You did read my post right?

Even so, to address your inquiry, BEFORE man could scientifically record the climate and its day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month, year-to-year, decade-to-decade and century-to-century fluctuations, man had no clue about global warming or cooling. Written records exists, but without some tangible, objective data, we can only guess at what was going on before the invention of things like thermometers.

However, since we have been able to scientifically record the data from the past century or so, this data shows conclusively that global warming (or cooling) is directly related to the Sun's activities, and as you point out, before the so called industrial revolution, the climate on earth rose and fell, which the data again points to the Sun as being the progenitor of these fluctuations.

Rancho_Nirvana 06-28-2012 15:08

PW, it's evident these are just your everyday troll types looking to bait people into never ending dialogue that they perpetuate by never refuting anything with actual facts, but instead offer little more than weak, subjective, simpleton bull**** in its place.

countrygun 06-28-2012 17:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rancho_Nirvana (Post 19141187)
PW, it's evident these are just your everyday troll types looking to bait people into never ending dialogue that they perpetuate by never refuting anything with actual facts, but instead offer little more than weak, subjective, simpleton bull**** in its place.


You are, after all, the resident specialist in simpleton bull****. You couch it in fancy terms to feign intellectual content, but upon examination it is just third-grade thinking couched in a college vocabulary.

In short, you are little more than the fly on the bull pile.

Rancho_Nirvana 06-28-2012 17:51

Quote:

"Oh bother" said Pooh...
Awe CG, what would Pooh say? lol

...as far as recognizing simpleton BS when I see it, no need to give me so much credit, its not like you've camouflaged it..

Arquebus12 06-28-2012 22:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rancho_Nirvana (Post 19141187)
PW, it's evident these are just your everyday troll types looking to bait people into never ending dialogue that they perpetuate by never refuting anything with actual facts, but instead offer little more than weak, subjective, simpleton bull**** in its place.

Pot, meet Kettle. :wavey:

Peace Warrior 06-29-2012 02:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arquebus12 (Post 19142828)
Pot, meet Kettle. :wavey:

Hey, a response from the ultimate epitome of the ignorant pragmatic.

Welcome to the thread Arq! :wavey:

Arquebus12 06-29-2012 05:17

Pragmatic, yes... Ignorant? Not only am I smarter than you, I've read more books, absorbed more philosophy, studied more discerning thought disciplines than you, I'm also taller, stronger, better looking, and have been with more women than you.

Further, I'm a better shot, have more friends, more guns, and drive a cooler/newer vehicle than you. I even make prettier babies than you can. But most importantly, I will never be even briefly considered as moonbat crazy as you. Know why? Because I'm not afraid to admit to how little I really know.

So let's dance, Thumbdick! Quote me and dissect my rhetoric.

:rofl:

Rancho_Nirvana 06-29-2012 08:08

PW, I think a knat just landed on your ass... or at least the equivalent thereof.

Arquebus12 06-29-2012 10:43

It's spelled G-N-A-T, ye of abundant intellect. Damn, you ignorant! How's a fella supposed to engage in a battle of wits against such a poorly armed opponent? Bah! It's like entering into the octagon and going up against a Girl Scout.

Go ahead and rail away, Faulkner, and I'll pop in from time to time and pretend to give the tiniest damn. Don't bottle it up, get it off your little chicken chest, and teach me a lesson with your fount of wisdom....

You're on. Dazzle me with your rhetoric, Betty.

Peace Warrior 06-29-2012 13:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rancho_Nirvana (Post 19143564)
PW, I think a knat just landed on your ass... or at least the equivalent thereof.

Careful, he'll insist we are mad at him and that his work is done here. :whistling:

Rancho_Nirvana 06-29-2012 18:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peace Warrior (Post 19144593)
Careful, he'll insist we are mad at him and that his work is done here. :whistling:

Naw PW, a clod's work is never done...I think the evidence will bear me out here. ;-)

(Eeerr... Got me on the gnat thing tho...lol... frickin frackin...)

Arquebus12 06-29-2012 19:28

Coupla fags... TRY HARDER!

Peace Warrior 06-29-2012 19:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rancho_Nirvana (Post 19145436)
Naw PW, a clod's work is never done...I think the evidence will bear me out here. ;-)

(Eeerr... Got me on the gnat thing tho...lol... frickin frackin...)

I love how people using Firefox browsers become experts at spelling as well as grammar nazis. ;)

G23Gen4TX 06-29-2012 21:13

Anyone who claims to be an architect and says that WTC 1&2 were controlled demolition is an idiot and should be kept to designing dog houses.

Ignoring the two large airplanes that hit the buildings, the fires, the point of failure (the point of impact on both buildings) is just dumb. The collapse looked NOTHING like a controlled demolition.

Thinking building 7 was controlled demolition? I can see why someone would think so but after checking the evidence you see again that t wasn't. Fire and a weak area in the structure is what brought the building down.

You don't have to melt steal. You just have to make it weak enough and it won't support that structure.

As for JFK. I live near Dallas and about 3 years ago I went to the 6th floor museum. You get to take a look from the window right next to the one Oswald took the shot from. It's a very easy shot. Very easy.

countrygun 06-29-2012 22:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by G23Gen4TX (Post 19146102)
Anyone who claims to be an architect and says that WTC 1&2 were controlled demolition is an idiot and should be kept to designing dog houses.

Ignoring the two large airplanes that hit the buildings, the fires, the point of failure (the point of impact on both buildings) is just dumb. The collapse looked NOTHING like a controlled demolition.

Thinking building 7 was controlled demolition? I can see why someone would think so but after checking the evidence you see again that t wasn't. Fire and a weak area in the structure is what brought the building down.

You don't have to melt steal. You just have to make it weak enough and it won't support that structure.

As for JFK. I live near Dallas and about 3 years ago I went to the 6th floor museum. You get to take a look from the window right next to the one Oswald took the shot from. It's a very easy shot. Very easy.


Heat steel and it bends. no secret. heat steel with that much weight above it, you get a cascade failure.

Or you can belive that a group of exremist whack jobs were a key part of a complex scheme in which they had to hit exactly the right floors with hijacked airplanes to cover the detonation of all those explosives that nobody noticed being planted in the building:upeyes:

why don't you guys go back to eating the grapes off the wallpaper.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:45.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2013, Glock Talk, All Rights Reserved.